I appologize for my comment that phone is for CBers. My lame attempt at humor does look like an insult.

I think that so many apartment dwellers and others with antenna restrictions can have a great time on the air by using CW. 5 watts to a small antenna and you can work DX on CW where no Phone QSO would be possible.

Unofficial "novice" bands on 80, 40, and 20 meters could encourage new hams to try CW. Where do they go now to try out CW? Jump in with the fast guys and they become intimidated. But have 10 kHz novice segments that they can go to for QRS QSOs and more new hams will be introduced to CW.

I guess it all depends on where you stand, but I guess by your definition some of us (like me) must be Ancient Timers, or Jurassic Hams.

No, I just don't like these broad, sweeping statements about "Old timers causing all the problems". Most of the time, that kind of statement comes from someone who believes 5 years licensed puts one in that category.

I can see how that happens, though, because after almost 55 years on the air, I think OTs are anyone licensed longer than me.

Sorry, wasn't my intent. I know what ya mean, though, somebody mentions a song or movie that to me is "recent", and it turns out to be 25-35+ years old.

K4DPK: "I guess it all depends on where you stand, but I guess by your definition some of us (like me) must be Ancient Timers, or Jurassic Hams. "

Maybe we need to redefine the terms. Perhaps Old Timer should require 40 years licensed and Old Old Timer should require 60 years licensed.

Works for me!

K4DPK: "No, I just don't like these broad, sweeping statements about "Old timers causing all the problems"."

Me neither. Particularly since, if it weren't for those same old-timers, we wouldn't have amateur radio at all.

K4DPK: "Most of the time, that kind of statement comes from someone who believes 5 years licensed puts one in that category."

Which is nothing new.

Way back in the days of spark and the early refugees from the light-bulb factory, there was a series of stories about "Rotten Radio" by The Old Man. In those stories were characters such as Young Squirt, Radical, and Final Authority. Change the technology a little and those stories apply today.

K4DPK: "I can see how that happens, though, because after almost 55 years on the air, I think OTs are anyone licensed longer than me."

Me too. I remember the Ancient Ones who were long-time hams when I got started - and now I'm older and longer-time than they are.

It's easy - and incorrect - to blame the old timers for the way things are. That's because:

- Not all the old timers agreed on everything or anything

- Old timers had only limited control over what happened

- There were many factors back-when that newcomers don't understand or take into account

Most of all, though, it's an easy out rather than dealing with the complexities.

--

I think we really do need a "Mythbusters" forum here on eham, because there are so many myths and inaccuracies that more than a few hams have accepted without question. Such as why we use LSB on 75 and USB on 20. Or the use of resistors as fuses.

Yes i still have a CB or two here. And if someone has an issue with it tough luck! Nobody is better than someone else. We all put our pants on the same way. Ask yorself WWJD???The response to me typing 83 was just a typo. I meant 73 so shoot me. I DO know CW and ill admit that I HAVE used it. Its just not for me. CW isnt the end all be all of ham radio IMHO.I also use PSK 31, RTTY, Olivia, ect ect.

An admirable philosophy but it rings hollow. By establishing criteria of "better" we can surely rank people and say who is better or not.

When comparing the average CB operator and the average HAM operator we might use the criterion of 'intellectual development through their radio hobby' to rank them. We might use the criterion of 'adherence to FCC rules and regulatons.' We might use the criterion of 'formal education.'

By a majority of reasonable criterion I believe we would find that a HAM is "better" than a CB operator.

At the risk of igniting a firestorm of unsupported opinions, what prevents us from applying criteria of this very type to CW hams and non-CW hams?

My curiosity and philosophical education gets the better of me and so...

To categorize intellectual endeavor with its attendant devotion of time and effort as "better" places CW as being "better" than non-CW. to categorize intellectual endeavor as 'no better' places CW and non-CW at equal levels of betterness. And to categorize intellectual endeavor as 'less better' places CW below non-CW.

We therefore have three choices based on my argument:

1) CW hams are better than non-CW hams2) CW hams are no better than non-CW hams3) CW hams are less better than non-CW hams

We can eliminate (3) out of hand. That leaves us with a choice between (1) and (2). Given the weight that our society gives to intellectual endeavor the win goes to (1).

I'm sorry there is no way to honestly soft peddle this. To do so is to throw sop.

I know i seem outspoken but i just see things in a real light. I am a realist. We are all equal in te lords eyes. We all get up in the am put our clothes and shoes on the same way and eat sleep and dream just like everyone else. People who act like the are better than someone else are shallow. I see right throgh these types of people. This is especially bad on ham radio. Someone may think they are better than someone else because of the mode they choose to favor, the lisense they hold, and the way they passed to get the license. Im not that way. We all are in this hobby for one thing, because we have a passion and love fr radio and electronics! Am i right? Sure i am! Because this is true! Myself, I enjoy ALL aspects of radio from SWL, CB, FRS, to broadcast radio and ham radio. To me its all good! Yeah sure, there are some knuckel heads on CB but there just as many on ham radio and no, they are NOT all new no coders. The ones I hear are older 20 WPM Extras, 13 WPM Advances and Generals, all higher ranking hams than I. i love this hobby but i just dont tolerate some of the tripe that comes with it. I know this is like fighting a battle with one hand behind my back but thats how it is.

Oh and yes, I use a straight CW key as well as a "vibrokeyer" and sometims a computer to send and receive code.

Sometimes those who act better are better. Sometimes they are not. I don't think we can generalize here. Might they be realists? They need not be falsely humble.

What is a realist? A definition I will make up now is that a realist is one who looks at things objectively, from all angles, dispassionately, who can back up his claims (if any) through logic. He does not default to dogma whether that be political, religious, or otherwise. He can debate his point of view politely and when compelling contrary evidence is presented he is able to discard his previous view. He is open minded.

"Better" people can only be judged in terms of acts, behavior or performance.

Picasso was a better painter than Warhol (even Warhol would have agreed with that) and W. A. Mozart was a better musical composer than Ray Stevens.

The behavior of Mother Teresa was better than that of Saddam Hussein, but we cannot elevate ourselves to sit in judgment of a person's humanity. We can judge a person's actions and nothing more.

I think the other poster is making the same point as this, but whether a ham is better according to "CW" is not a good question. (I assume that means whether the ham knows Morse code.) A person can know code quite well but still know nothing of electronics, antennas or band plans. So "CW" or code skill in itself is neither necessary nor a sufficient condition to qualify as a "better" ham.

K5END writes: ""Better" people can only be judged in terms of acts, behavior or performance."

Exactly. But what else is there?

K5END: "Picasso was a better painter than Warhol (even Warhol would have agreed with that) and W. A. Mozart was a better musical composer than Ray Stevens.

The behavior of Mother Teresa was better than that of Saddam Hussein, but we cannot elevate ourselves to sit in judgment of a person's humanity. We can judge a person's actions and nothing more."

But what does it mean to "judge a person's humanity"?

One person does horrific things to others for no reason, resulting in death, suffering and destruction. What sort of humanity could such a person have?

K5END: "I think the other poster is making the same point as this, but whether a ham is better according to "CW" is not a good question. (I assume that means whether the ham knows Morse code.) A person can know code quite well but still know nothing of electronics, antennas or band plans. So "CW" or code skill in itself is neither necessary nor a sufficient condition to qualify as a "better" ham."

I've never met an amateur who knew code quite well but knew nothing of electronics, antennas or band plans.

Knowledge isn't a zero-sum game, where knowing something like Morse Code automatically means a person won't know something else, like Smith Charts. If anything, knowledge is one of those things where the result is greater than the sum of the parts. A symbiotic relationship, so to speak, and Morse Code knowledge is part of it.

For example, consider how many hams you know who have built rigs from scratch. I'm not talking about kits or accessories, nor conversion of surplus or restoration of old rigs. I mean complete working stations from parts.

I think you'll find that most of those folks know Morse Code. Knowing code let them start with simple designs and build up their knowledge and experience to more-complex designs. I mean, how many folks would build an HF SSB transceiver as a first project?

Or consider the ham with limited cash to spend on amateur radio, but who wants to get on HF. Which mode will give the most results for the least money spent?

One more point: Consider the title of this thread. The original author is complaining about the on-air behavior he's hearing on 160. What mode are those folks using?

Copyright 2000-2017 eHam.net, LLC
eHam.net is a community web site for amateur (ham) radio operators around the world.
Contact the site with comments or questions.
WEBMASTER@EHAM.NETSite Privacy Statement